Search Results

1. TS v BO & TO [2023] NZDT 97 (22 February 2023) [pdf, 128 KB]

   ...Respondents. 2. WU is to be removed as Respondent. 3. The claim against CX is dismissed. Reasons 1. The above parties are the owners of a cross lease title at [Address]: a. TS is a trustee of the S Trust which owns Flat 3. b. BO and TO are former owners of 1. c. WU is a former owner of Flat 1. d. CX is the current owner of Flat 1. 2. WU did not attend the hearing or offer any defence to the claim. The absence of a party does not prevent a hearing from going ahead.

2. MA v X Ltd [2023] NZDT 704 (20 December 2023) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...have found that MA breached X Ltd’s rules, there is no need for me to consider this issue. Accordingly, MA’s claim against X Ltd is dismissed. Referee: K. Armstrong Date: 20 December 2023 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a...

3. BT v HT [2024] NZDT 353 (7 May 2024) [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...Zealand Law (online ed, Thomson Reuters) at [59.24.2]. 2 Blumberg v Frucor Beverages Limited [2018] NZHC 1876. 3 Frucor Beverages Ltd v Blumberg [2020] 2 NZLR 51 at para 129, quoting an Australian decision with approval. Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for...

4. TN v A Ltd [2024] NZDT 752 (1 October 2024) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...commensurate with the service she received, in this case, half the contract price. Referee: Hannan DTR Date: 1 October 2024 1 Subject to some exceptions that are not relevant here. Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply...

5. EJ v ND & CG [2024] NZDT 400 (7 June 2024) [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...of this case. Conclusion 12. As I have found that EJ has proven he is entitled to be compensated for $12,000.00, an order is made to that effect. Referee: Ms Cowie DTR Date: 7 June 2024 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehe...

6. KS v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 540 (10 July 2024) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...circumstances, I am not persuaded the applicant has been changed an excessive amount and on that basis the applicant’s claim is dismissed. Referee: Hannan DTR Date: 10 July 2024 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply fo...

7. KS v Q Ltd [2025] NZDT 16 (16 January 2025) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...down as much it does when the 10kg weight is placed on the side of the mattress. b) The price paid is at the lower end of the mattress market. A reasonable consumer paying $549.00 for a king size mattress would not expect a very high level of performance from a mattress described as ‘firm’. c) KS purchased the mattress online and did not inspect or try the mattress. The mattress was listed as firm, however what is firm to one person may not be firm to another. KS did not make...

8. NX v KT [2024] NZDT 777 (3 December 2024) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...of the fake bag she has retained. 16. For these reasons, I award damages of $1,186.00 to NX, which KT is to pay by the date set out in the order. Referee: Saegers DTR Date: 3 December 2024 Page 3 of 3 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a re...

9. C Ltd & B Ltd v SU [2024] NZDT 28 (1 February 2024) [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...26. I find that the way in which B Ltd dealt with the quoting and subsequent invoicing of this job was likely to mislead SU. 27. B Ltd made a representation that “…. we could do this for $19,979.09 + GST.” This was in response to a request by SU for B Ltd to have a look at “the quote for any savings that could be made….” 28. The quote which SU asked B Ltd to look at included the price for not only the roofing work, but also the spouting and scaffolding work....

10. AET Ltd v ZVB Ltd [2013] NZDT 196 (3 August 2013) [pdf, 54 KB]

    ...cut out of three joints. The sealant depth in two joints was satisfactory; however, the sealant in the third joint was found not to be deep enough. AET Ltd remedied the problem by putting more sealant over the existing sealant. [4] AET Ltd claims the outstanding sum of $4,224.69 plus $1,249.07 in interest and costs. [5] After some discussion, the parties agreed that the sealing depth should be half as deep as the width of a joint with a specified minimum depth. Is...